In this talk I will discuss the behaviour and categorial status of participle-looking words modifying NP heads within Hungarian and English DPs, cf. (1) and (2). First, I will offer a more tenable and comprehensive analysis of the Hungarian data, based on partially new empirical generalizations, and then I will show how some crucial aspects of this account can lead to a better understanding of the corresponding English phenomena. Finally, I will point out the significance of my findings for the relevant portion of an LFG-style grammar.

In Hungarian NPs, both adjectival and participial constituents, whether with or without complements, precede the noun head. Compare (1) with (2) and the Hungarian examples with their English translations in (3). As regards the empirical generalizations about the use of -/- '-ing' ("present") participles and participle => adjective conversion, I will adopt Komlsy's (1994) approach. Then I will make partially new generalizations about the use of -(t)t '-en' ("passive/perfect") participles and the rules for participle => adjective conversion. The central issue will be the discussion of participle formation and participle => adjective conversion based on a subtype of transitive predicates. Its essence is as follows. If there is a transitive verb pair, one of them with a perfectivizing preverb and the other without it, then the version with the preverb always has a telic interpretation. It can combine with -(t)t (see (4a)); however, the participle derived in this way cannot serve as input to participle => adjective conversion. The version without the preverb has both telic and atelic uses. It can combine with -(t)t in both its uses (see (4b)). Participle => adjective conversion based on the telic use is also possible. (4c) shows that the preverbed form cannot be converted into an adjective, and the preverbless version must be used for conversion purposes. The intended adjectival meaning is to denote a kind of meat.

In the second part of the talk I will compare the participle formation and the participle => adjective conversion rules proposed in Komlsy (1994) and in the first part of the talk for Hungarian with those in Bresnan (to appear) for English. The three most important generalizations emerging from Bresnan's (to appear) system (which seems to represent mainstream views in the recent literature) are as follows. 1) All premodifying participle-looking elements are adjectives in English. Thus, all the four relevant elements in (5) are adjectives on this account. 2) Some postmodifying participle-looking elements are also adjectives (see (6a)) and some others are participles (see (6b)). 3) All participle-looking words taken to be adjectives are stative, for instance all the four elements in (5).

Partially motivated by the corresponding Hungarian phenomena and partially on the basis of the investigation of the relevant English data, I will challenge generalization 1) and also the widely adopted view going back to Bolinger (1967), at least, that premodifying participle(-looking word)s express characteristic features while postmodifying participle(-looking word)s denote occasions (events), cf.: deposited money vs. money withdrawn. I will suggest the following alternative analysis. A) The premodifying position in English NPs is also available to -ing and -en participles. B) These participles, when derived from dynamic base verbs, are not stative. Instead, they denote anterior or simultaneous events in which the entity expressed by the modified noun head is a participant. I will argue that the four elements in (5) are participles and they are not stative. C) Informants' judgements suggest that the premodifying position is no longer exclusively associated with the "characteristic" (as opposed to the "occasional") interpretation. D) Premodifying participles (just like premodifying adjectives) only allow premodification within their own constituents, which can be explained by a branching uniformity principle. There is a severe restriction even on the form of this premodification: fundamentally, only -ly adverbs can be used (recently, newly, unexpectedly, professionally, carefully, etc.). When the participle is modified by such elements, the premodifying use of the participial constituent is strongly preferred. E) Participle => adjective conversion basically derives two types of adjectives - (i) ordinary adjectives: a surprising fact, a qualified teacher; (ii) type-denoting adjectives: a travelling salesman, granulated sugar. It is these adjectives that are appropriately considered stative.

At the end of the talk, I will spell out the rules for the modifying use of participles in Hungarian and English NPs as well as the rules for participle => adjective conversion. In Hungarian, the two participles can only be used within NPs. -/- participle formation follows the ordinary active pattern, while -(t)t is "semi-ergative", it obligatorily maps the [-r] argument of the predicate onto SUBJ: it attaches to unaccusatives, transitives (obligatorily passivizing them) and it cannot combine with unergatives. Conversion from -(t)t participles derives two types of adjectives. One of them is similar to ordinary (non-derived) adjectives: this type can be used in comparative and superlative forms, it can be modified by adverbs capable of modifying adjectives in general and usually it can be used predicatively, cf. meglep-ett 'surprise-d'. The other type (exemplified in (4c)) normally lacks these adjectival features and it makes up a phonological word with the noun head and it specifies the kind of the entity expressed by the noun. In English, (active) -ing participles can be used as modifiers without any restriction, while passive -en and perfect -en participles, when used as modifiers, "jointly" follow the semi-ergative pattern manifested by Hungarian -(t)t. Participle => adjective conversion in English is fundamentally similar to that in Hungarian.

(1) a. a mosolyg- fi
the smile-ing boy
'the smiling boy'

b. a lny-on mosolyg- fi
the girl-on smile-ing boy
'the boy smiling at the girl'

c. a meg-darl-t hs
the PERF-mince-en meat
'the minced meat'

d. a Jnos ltal darl-t hs
the John by mince-en meat
'The meat minced/being minced by John'

(2) a. the smiling boy
     b. the boy smiling at the girl
     c. the minced meat
     d. the meat minced by John

(3) a. a bszke anya
the proud mother
'the proud mother'

b. a lny--ra bszke anya
the daughter-her-onto proud mother
'the mother proud of her daughter'

(4) a. A meg-darl-t hs-t be-te-ttem a ht-be.   (participle) anterior
the PERF-mince-en meat-acc in-put-Past.1sg.def the fridge-into cca.
'I put the minced meat (=the meat that had been minced) into the fridge.'

b. J illat-a van a Jnos ltal darl-t hs-nak.
(participle) anterior or simultaneous good smell-its is the John by mince-en meat-dat

'The meat minced/being minced by John has a good smell.'

c. Tegnap a bolt-ban ve-ttem egy kis (*meg-)darl-t hs-t. (adjective)

yesterday the store-in buy-Past.1sg.def a little PERF-mince-en meat-acc

'Yesterday I bought a little minced meat in the store.'

(5) a. a smiling child
b. a falling leaf
c. a fallen leaf
d. an opened can

(6) a. feathers still unstuffed into their pillows
b. the boy eating popcorn noisily

References